So you mean I just can't go hang with my geology buddies down at U of R who are working on this project for both PTRC/SaskPower and the NGO group called IPAC-C02?
Sask., Ottawa reach deal on greenhouse gases
- Thread starter petros
- Start date
Absolutely not! It's all a sham. Proven a failure!
Cuz Cabbagehead and the bloggers he parrots say so!
On a serious note, you and Ton have found common ground. I like that!
I was thinking more like the OWS and Montreal crew. At least that way all the ideologues would justify any and all illegal and unethical behavior you commit!
Ohhh okay. But OWS has been done already. We need something new like buying up all the polar bear cans of Coke and hiding them so nobody opens them to release the CO2.
Then you're barking up the wrong tree.
He doesn't know what debate, discuss, or converse means.
I think cabagefarts will be finding another forum to bullshyte in. This is now the second time, that I have noticed, that Ton has disagreed with him, or called him on his BS. This is not a good thing when you have recognized that someone as an expert ally
Oh I doubt he'll be leaving anytime to soon. That would require smarts. He has made it very clear, that though he may be intelligent, he isn't very smart.
How about taking over the welfare offices all around the country. That at least will make the freeloaders sit up and take notice when their cheques fail to arrive.
Of course it is a failure and I have said clearly why it is. I expect the Bear to try to put down the references I gave but you know better who they are and how credible they are. It is a failure because it cannot deliver on the promise. Storage capacity is far more limited than thought and the security is not so great. It also, as I said, can be of litle practical se in alleviating the problem it supposedly addresses for many years by which time, it will be far too late.
Why would I say electric vehicles are a failure? They will be part of the long term solution but, not until the source of their fuel is taken away from the sources of CO2 that need sequestration.
Like little progress, and the only place you know of is in Norway. Which isn't true. Tell me, who made the first social media website? Who made the first internet search engine? The first mp3 player?
At one point there were very few players, but the kinks get worked out.
Being ideological and simply calling new technology a failure because it hasn't taken off isn't pragmatic, or realistic at all. That's why I made the analogy to electric cars. They haven't taken off yet. And by the way, even if they were fueled by coal plant generated electricity, if all the cars on the road were electric that would be far less emission of greenhouse gases. Far less.
There is 20 years worth of experience and research in SK when it comes to CCS. CCS may be new but storing gasses in the strata has been around for a long long time already. Nat gas storage caverns are a great example.
Where is the ideology in noting what scientists are saying or statistics are showing? How is citing observation and experience ideological?
You might like to read this and the links, including one to an update by Socolow concerning his wedges.
RealClimate: Carbon Capture And Storage
The present state of CCS is that the total sequestered to this time (annually) is about 1/10th. of 1% of the amount by wich emissions need to be reduced.
I wrote of Norway because it is, by far, the most advanced in the technology and in experimental facilities. Norway, with much fanfare, a couple of years ago, announced a new facility to both sequester and test technologies. Unfortunately, it would sequester only 1/10th. of the emissions from the plant where it was to be installed. It has been delayed because, as Norway now syas, the investment is slow since it needs a price for carbon of about four times that of the present. Norway's investment has turned out to be many times what was thought to be required.
Alberta has also delayed and probably, ended some of its projects.
The point is, that CCS has been touted as the saviour and has turned out to be nothing more than a band aid. The Conservative government and the Alberta governments have been trying to sll CCS as their answer to Canada's emissions for several years. Their pretense is now blown.
In Europe several projected facilities have been stalled for the same reason.